|
Rottweiller,
I have taken the time to start a read of the essay in question. I have never bothered to read about the definition of United States as it relates to the condition of being of the people or not; so I considered this a good place to stop and do some research. However, I had to stop and prepare this contradiction of the premise presented based on the following:
Here is more misinformation from the Essay on Citizenship found on the Minnesota Common Law Library site. Please notice the writer states a certain definition for United States is found at a certain place in the United States Code. There is not a problem, so far.
However in the next sentence the writer states, and I quote in part, "In this section the “United States means–“. When one refers to Title 28, Part VI, Chapter 176, sub-chapter A–Definitions and General Provisions; one will find this phrase, “As used in this chapter;” at the beginning of section 3002. The writer of the essay states incorrectly as shown below. It is a small point, I know.
“In the United States Code there is found a definition of the United States under Title 28, Section 3002 (15)(A). In this section the “United States means – (A) a Federal corporation.” The United States means a Federal corporation. A corporation, according to Black’s is: “An artificial person or legal entity created by or under the authority of the laws of a state.” A more encompassing definition is provided by the United States Supreme Court in Hale v. Henkel:”
The misstatement, referred to by me in a previous post, by the writer may be a small error as well. But I am beginning to question how many small error does this essay contain. If it contains a number of small errors, is it possible it contains some gross errors as well?
I would like to point out now what I think is one of those gross errors of both content and reasoning. I think the common held belief by many is that the definition at section 3002, 15 (A) proves the United States is only a corporation. I do not agree with this belief. One of the many problems created by those who write about legal issues is they present only that part of something they think will prove their point. They will intentionally leave out anything else even if pertinent. I think it is important for everyone to see the totality of the definition found as a part of 3002, so here it is copied and pasted:
15) “United States” means—
(A) a Federal corporation;
(B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or
(C) an instrumentality of the United States.
When I look at the definition in its totality I see another possibility. Since the United States has the power to create Federal corporations just as it has the power to create agencies, departments, commissions, boards, other entities and instrumentalities; all of these things created by the United States are subjects of the rules found in chapter 176; sections 3001 to 3015, inclusive.
It could also mean when the United States enters court for a Federal Debt Collection Procedure, it does so as a corporation.
There could be other meanings, vis-a-vis chapter 176, for United States I have not even begun to find. I do not have an annotated copy so I cannot go to any case law for assistance.
In my opinion the writer of the essay is wrong about the meaning of the term United States being the Federal corporation. The only way he could use his error in analysis is to omit the balance of the definitions from any consideration.
Could I be wrong in my analysis? Of course, I could. This is the first time I have looked at any of this. The one statement I can make with certainty, though, is I will look at the totality of it all. I will not cherry pick, as the writer of the essay did.
Irrespective of the above mistakes or errors of omission made by the writer, let us take a look at what effect the definition has on anything. It is a well settled point of legal analysis that the words mean what they state. Even if the writer of this essay were correct in all else; he is wrong about any effect the definition has. The definition for United States at section 3002 is one which has effect only on this chapter, and on nothing else.
Now let us go back to see what this chapter in Title 28 is about. The sub-chapter, as stated above is about Definitions and General Provisions, so the definition applies to it. The chapter. 176, is titled “Federal Debt Collection Procedure”, and since section 3002 stated, “As used in this chapter:”, the definition applies to it as well. Let us now travel back a bit further to Part VI. It is titled Particular Proceedings, and the part includes chapters 151 through 180 inclusive. Because of the phrase used in section 3002, the definition of United States is applicable only to chapter 176. It is not applicable to chapters 151 through 175, inclusive; nor to 177 through 180, inclusive.
It is certainly not applicable in any larger sense, such as to the Title, to the United States Code, to any State of the United States, to the United States in any other sense nor to any of the people living in any state or the country in general. The only way this definition could be applicable to anyone is if they were in Federal Court under the rules of the chapter.
If the writer of this essay has used the definition so constrained to prove that the naturalized or the native born are somehow subjects of nothing more than a Federal corporation; he has sadly missed the mark.
Perhaps on another day I will look at some more of this.
|